March 13, 2008
The Next Step Toward Global Islamization…
An international humanist organization has warned that Islamic governments are trying to use the United Nations to shut down free speech. The warning comes as a bloc of Islamic states is holding a summit with “Islamophobia” high on the agenda.
The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) on Thursday began a meeting in Senegal, with the shadow of Danish cartoons satirizing Mohammed and a Dutch lawmaker’s film criticizing the Koran hanging heavily over the gathering.
The 57-member bloc is considering a report by a new body set up to monitor instances of what many Muslims view as growing prejudice against them and their religion, particularly in the years since 9/11.
Warning that Islamophobia poses a threat to global peace and security, the 58-page report by the “Islamophobia Observatory” examines the reasons for the perceived trend — exemplified by stereotyping, hostility, discriminatory treatment and the denigration of “the most sacred symbols of Islam” — and suggests ways to combat it.
The recommended steps include a range of responses, including monitoring of and responding to incidents, and a campaign to show Islam to be a “moderate, peaceful and tolerant” religion.
But the report also says that legal measures are required.
Legal measures, huh?
“There is a need for a binding legal instrument to fight the menace of Islamophobia in the context of freedom of religion and elimination of religious intolerance,” it says.
“The Islamophobes remain free to carry on their assaults due to absence of legal measures necessary for misusing or abusing the right to freedom of expression.”
Islamic states must therefore keep “the pressure on the international community at the multilateral forums and bilateral agendas,” the OIC report recommends.
Since the uproar over the Mohammed cartoons in 2006, the OIC has stepped up its attempts in international forums to protect Islam against criticism. Late last year it succeeded in getting the U.N. General Assembly to pass a first-ever resolution on the “defamation of religions.” Islam was the only religion mentioned by name in the text.
The OIC has 56 votes at the 192-member General Assembly, but it managed to win sufficient support from non-Muslim nations, mostly in the developing world, to see the resolution pass by 108 votes to 51, with 25 abstentions.
Repeat after me: The U.N. is our friend. The U.N. is our friend. The U.N…. ah, forget it, even after I repeated it 1000 times, I still wouldn’t be able to convince myself of its veracity.
As the U.N. prepares later this year to mark the 60th anniversary of the landmark Universal Declaration of Human Rights, some observers worry about the growing clout of the Islamic bloc, and its agenda.
In a statement delivered to the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva on Wednesday, the International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU), a non-governmental organization with consultative status at the U.N., voiced concerns about the OIC push.
“The implications of this [defamation of religions] resolution for freedom to criticize religious laws and practices are obvious,” the IHEU said.
“Armed with U.N. approval for their actions, states may now legislate against any show of disrespect for religion however they may choose to define ‘disrespect.’”
As I understand it, the U.N. is supposed to deal between governments, not supplant them.
“The Islamic states see human rights exclusively in Islamic terms, and by sheer weight of numbers this view is becoming dominant within the U.N. system,” the organization added. “The implications for the universality of human rights are ominous.”
And this,
The charter would be in accordance with the provisions of the 1990 Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam - the last major OIC human rights document - which says that all human rights and freedom must be subject to Islamic law (shari’a).
“Everyone shall have the right to express his opinion freely in such manner as would not be contrary to the principles of the shari’a,” it says.
Emphasis mine.
Of course, the U.N. will do the usual — perform the kiss of shame on the Islamofacists of the OIC and in so doing, attempt to hammer yet another nail in the coffin of the free world.
These people are truly amazing in the scope of their stupidity: Anyone with an IQ of 6 who has their access to information should be able to see what the leaders of the Islamic nations are trying to do, yet they simply suck it up and go with the program, not seeming to grasp the very real fact that their own personal freedoms are as much on the line as everybody else’s, that once Sharia has been successfully foisted on the western world, they’ll be the first to go.
I’d like to see our government and those of other free countries fight the OIC charter tooth and nail at the U.N., but with their collective recent track record of sucking up to Islam as any kind of indicator, I won’t hold my breath.
The question of free speech and its effect on religious sentiment has been on the Human Rights Council’s agenda this week.
On Wednesday, the council considered a report by a U.N. “special rapporteur” on freedom of expression and opinion, Kenyan lawyer Ambeyi Ligabo.
Ligabo said he was concerned about attempts to expand the scope of defamation laws beyond the protection of individuals, to include the protection of “abstract values or institutions” such as religions.
Where international human rights documents placed limitations on freedom of expression, he told the council, they were designed to protect individuals — not religions — from criticism.
Ligabo also said he “strongly rejected” the view that the use of freedom of expression has undermined people’s ability to enjoy other rights, such as the freedom of religion.
His stance drew criticism from some Islamic states in the council.
Iranian representative Asadollah Eshragh Jahromi said Ligabo should address the issue of freedom of expression and religion “in a more balanced and comprehensive manner.”
“Insulting religions is incompatible with the right to freedom of expression and cannot be justified or interpreted under such a pretext,” he said.
“When someone defames a religion or religious personalities or symbols, he hurts the believers of that faith and impinges on his exercise of right to religion and belief,” said the representative of Bangladesh, Mustafizur Rahman.
The OIC and its allies effectively dominate the Human Rights Council, where 26 of the 47 seats are earmarked for African and Asian countries.
Emphasis again mine.
I fully understand that the oil lying underneath so much Islamic soil is a major factor behind Islam’s international “influence”, so perhaps we need to rethink certain policies in that regard.
http://hardastarboard.mu.nu/wp-trackback.php?p=797
March 13th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
The Alberta tar sands sound real good: “It costs about $25 a barrel to produce crude from Canada’s oil sands, … By comparison, it can cost as little as about $5 a barrel to produce crude in the Middle East and $15 in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico.” *
Since the stuff is currently going for $100/bl, I suppose we blame the dems for where the OTHER $85-95
per drum is going? Yes, specificially, I think Carter.
Got it..Carter and the libtards are stealing the other
$85-95. They are out by the derricks now….:)
*source: http://zfacts.com/p/218.html
March 13th, 2008 at 11:19 pm
BB –
On the other hand, a) buying this oil with all its availability could render the Saudi product moot from our perspective and perhaps inspire our politicians to stop kissing Arabian backsides and start “laying down the law”, so to speak, b) the ingenuity for which folks are known over here could be put to work to seek less expensive recovery methods and, for the environmentalists out there, ways to cut down on “greenhouse gas” emissions during said recovery and c) you’re right, it is Jimmy Carter, I can tell by the teeth (at first I thought that feller was an aging chipmunk, then I realized it is him, standing over there beside the tool pusher, by gum)!
March 14th, 2008 at 8:39 am
Read or heard somewhere that USA/Europe oil consumption is steady or decreasing slightly..but China and India have sharply increasing consumption.
As with any finite source, we will see some bizarre
prices in the next few years as the fields dry up.
BTW, this arthritis in my neck…ol Carter?
March 14th, 2008 at 11:42 am
BB –
I think the increase in Chinese oil consumption has more to do with China’s penchant over the last couple of years or so for hoarding oil, buying much more than they need in order to bolster military reserves.
we will see some bizarre prices in the next few years as the fields dry up.
I can’t wait to see what happens when that hits the ol’ portside pocketbooks. Blaming whichever boss Republican is handy won’t be enough, they’ll have to either punch a few more holes in their belts or make some concessions re drilling in Alaska, building more reactors, etc. If they wait too long to reach these conclusions, there will be a few really nasty years before the needed relief is able to be enjoyed.
That, or we’ll all have to get used to hunkering down around the fire in the winter, cooking over it all year and doing all our travelling on foot, horseback or, in some cases, camel.
Carter won’t ever have the worries: He’ll just start drilling for peanut oil.
March 14th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
The UN is our friend. The UN is our friend. The UN is our friend. The UN is not our friend. The United Nutjobs is not our friend. The Undignified Nitwits are not our friend! There! I finally got it right!
That’s descpicable, Seth. I don’t understand why people are so willing to kiss the backsides of Islam. Oh yeah, you told me. Oil! Well, I really would rather ride a horse and hunker down around a fire than kiss up to them!
I’ve been reading a lot about the Alberta Oil Sands, and even though it’s shale and takes longer to process, it will last for many, many years.
Here’s a great video. I know you will enjoy it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIaM1ycK9eU
March 14th, 2008 at 7:34 pm
And Condi Rice gave support to the OIC when she spoke of how the American government and the American people respect the values and ideals of Islam.
Condi Rice also did this incredibly idiotic thing.
Ah, well, our leaders are idiots. They’re going to stand by and let Islam overrun the world.
March 14th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
The solution to the problem faced by Islam is easy to solve. Just make it illegal to tell the truth. Then Islam will triumph.
March 15th, 2008 at 11:11 am
Of course, the U.N. will do the usual — perform the kiss of shame on the Islamofacists of the OIC and in so doing, attempt to hammer yet another nail in the coffin of the free world.
Proverbial frog in the boiling water analogy eh?
March 15th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
Sorry it’s taken me so long to get back here, I was tied up from the wee hours of the morning until just a little while ago, and this is the first time I’ve been able to get anywhere within a zillion miles of the computer.
Gayle –
Great video, thanks!
With Alberta’s resources so near at hand and in a country that’s actually our friend, as opposed to a takiyyah facsimile thereof, we’d be far better off in every conceivable way if we phased out our dealings with and dependence upon Arab countries for oil and looked to the “Great White North” (a little Bob & Doug MacKenzie, there, ay!).
Not only would we be dealing with people who share our western sensibilities, we would also be marginalizing the influence the Arabs currently have on some of our diplomatic positions.
Our standard line in the General Assembly could be, “Saudi who?”
AOW –
When Condi first became SecState, I admit that I was pretty happy about it, and believed it to be a good move. Dhimmitude like the above and her Israel policies have caused me to rethink my original impression in a 180 degree direction.
I think she must have tried some of Madeline Albright’s very special iced tea…
Shoprat –
LOL!
It is, after all, perfectly acceptable within the beliefs of a Muslim to lie to infidels, anyway.
Elmer’s Brother –
The Boiling Frog concept applies exactly to what is happening.
March 16th, 2008 at 11:17 am
First, the UN has been trying to block free speech for years and now the Islamos have given them but one more avenue to attempt what they have been trying without their help for years.
This has been one of the basic problems that we have had in prosecuting this war. Islamo have become politically correct. Organizations like the UN and many liberals see these murdering fanatics as , “freedom fighters, ” and not the murdering scum that they are. They are viewed as fighting the, “great satan, ” in order to bring peace and tranquility to Muslims and Arabs.
Now my initial thought to this idiotic ideological line of PC thinking is this. If Islamos are fighting the , “great satan, ‘ in order to bring peace and tranquility to Muslims and Arabs, then why are they killing as many or more Muslims and Arabs then they do Infidels ?
Could it be that instead of being, “freedom fighters, ” they are just murdering thugs who have corrupted a religion in order to use organizations like the UN as a means of bringing about World domination and forcing all mankind to bow to their demands and kneel at the feet of Allah and Mohammed subjegated to Islamo facists and becoming the slaves of fanatics ?
Or…maybe I just have an over active imagination. But the Towers still fell, the Pentagon walls collapsed, children are still being used as human bombs and now we see the handicapped and disabled being sent to, “sacrifice, ” for the virgins. SOOOO maybe my imagination it right on the mark then!
March 16th, 2008 at 9:45 pm
Ken –
Your “imagination” is right on the money.
An organization like the U.N. should be much more closely controlled than it is, kept to the standards and purposes for which it was created, but that is not the case — it has instead been controlled and manipulated by those who desire an entity through which they can impose their power on the entire world rather than simply moderating relations and negotiations between the various member states that participate in it.
The United States is a unique country — we were founded upon principles of freedom that, while profoundly successful and instrumental in making us far and away the richest and most powerful nation on the planet, have also rendered us the largest target of jealousy among countries and the greatest enemy, not of our choosing, of those who would deprive their own citizens of freedom.
By sheer force of numbers, the countries that count themselves among our detractors, including those run by Islamofascists, communists and other dictators, including those we’ve helped, have a say in the way we project our largesse and/or otherwise benevolent policies upon the rest of the world.
Now they are using the U.N. to further their anti-American and anti-freedom agendas.
EB is completely on target with his comparison to the Boiling Frog theory, that’s exactly what is happening.
The murderous agendas of Islam are presently registering themselves at the U.N. as acceptable and, as long as our government subscribes to that dubious organization, between its socialist and Islamofascist elements, we have noplace to go but down.
We really need to withdraw from the U.N. and kick them the hell out of N.Y.
Otherwise, enemies such as Islamic countries and terrorist organizations will continue to have influence on the workings of our own government.
In my personal opinion, we should not even belong to any organization that enjoins our own national policies and/or international relations with those of other countries.
After all, the United States of America is unique, we have very little in common, politically, with any other country.
Especially with Islamic nations who, as a matter of religious belief, sponsor terrorism as part of their root convictions.
The idea that Islamic governments have any kind of say in a global organization that has any say in anything involving America is outrageous, and the fact that our leadership allows it is bizarre.
We are headed for a future that no freedom-loving American will like.
Keep your rifle clean, and keep it loaded…
March 16th, 2008 at 9:53 pm
Oil is not a finite resource and there is more than enough if the environuts would just let drill for and process it, the US easily has enough known sources for over four hundred years.
Maybe folks would have more respect for islam if it showed more respect for non-muslims and quit blowing up innocent people in the name of their religion, the vast majority of people including muslims want nothing to do with sha`ria law and those that do want it are a small minority of fascist tyrants.
March 17th, 2008 at 5:15 am
Goat –
This is why I can’t help but sneer when a leftie tells me it’s Bush’s (or any Republicans’) fault, or even “Big Oil’s” fault that gas and other energy prices are as high as they are. Their own self-righteous resident environmentards are as much as or more to blame than anyone else. They are forever vigilant for opportunities to disallow the keys to energy independence, yet would be the first to deny this.
They seem to believe that all Americans can afford to trash their spontaneous combustion run vehicles and buy electric cars (waiver, of course, for all those well heeled liberals who drive Mercedes’ and Porsches), and rig their houses for solar and windmill energy (as long as the windmills don’t obstruct Teddy K’s ocean view) overnight. That, or they expect “the government” to pay for it all.
This is the problem on the left side of the equation: Many may be well intentioned, but few have the ability or the will to think things through from the viewpoint of reality. They can’t seem to lift themselves out of Utopia mode long enough to take a gander at the real world and see how it works. This applies not only to their environmental ideas, but to practically everything else as well (crime, the economy, national security, immigration, etc).
Where Islamofascism, terrorism et al are concerned, I place a good deal of the blame for the actions of the few on the non-actions of the many. Most so-called “moderate” Muslims do little to try to clean up their own community, as it were, but have no problem claiming victimhood when they are profiled or viewed with mistrust. Large numbers of these “peaceful” Muslims also belong to the same mosques that preach anti-western and anti-Jewish doctrine.
How many Islamic anti-Jihadi PACs are there, for example, and how large are their memberships?
March 17th, 2008 at 10:34 am
Goat’s “Oil is not a finite resource and there is more than enough if the environuts..” makes one wonder if he subcribes to the former Soviet abiotic theory rather than fossilization. Good theory..let’s not worry..let’s drill..its everywhere. BTW Bear-Stearns
assets are not a finite source.
March 17th, 2008 at 7:31 pm
BB –
Don’t bail-out funds count as assets?
You will note that though Goat said “not a finite resource”, he did add that there is a supply that is good for about 4 centuries. From the perspective of the present, 400 years is as good as not a finite resource for beaucoup generations to come — easily a dozen times more, given the ever-increasing speed of advances in every field, years necessary for other, less finite or self perpetuating fuel options to be unearthed.
The problem is that thanks to our precious political left, the transition from fossil fuels to whatever comes next will be tragic, as the resources that should be available to us will probably remain off limits.
March 17th, 2008 at 9:39 pm
Oil is a product of tectonic forces not dead dinosaurs as many believed decades ago.
March 17th, 2008 at 10:29 pm
Goat –
This is an interesting concept, but one with which I am totally unfamiliar. I attempted to look it up via search engines, etc, but all I get are unrelated or “we are running out of oil and that’s why we’re in Iraq!” type sites.
Help!!!!
March 18th, 2008 at 7:15 am
Brilliant work Seth..human rights and Issssssslam cant even go in one sentence!
see what they did to Ezra and Mark..sickening…excellent work!:)
March 18th, 2008 at 9:15 am
“This is an interesting concept, but one with which I am totally unfamiliar.”
It is just coming into it’s own in blogs which prefer the politics of the theory. See
http://www.energybulletin.net/2423.html
and Wiki has a pretty good summary of the technological arguments at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin
IMO, one’s POV is contingent on disagreeing with the
general thrust of scientific consensus: if you don’t believe global warming, you will believe abiogenesis.
March 18th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
Angel –
Thanks!
For some unfathomable reason, our own government, up to and including Bush and Rice, just don’t get it, as evidenced, among other things, by their support of Islamofascism in the Balkans despite what is happening over there — it seems that the Bush Administration is following in Clinton’s mistaken footsteps — and their Mid East policies.
BB –
Thanks for the link.
I have to go do some stuff that will keep me away from my computer for the next several hours, but I have printed a copy of the linked Energy Bulletin article and will study it in the course of that time — for me, “the layman”, it will require some study rather than simply reading it.
March 18th, 2008 at 7:47 pm
The gov up here refused to participate, or recognize, anything coming out of the UN HRC due to the overloading of radical muslim countries on that commission… More countries should have done the same… They have systematically infiltrated all parts of that organization.
If we can squash this AGW fraud, the oil will flow like no tomorrow…
March 19th, 2008 at 4:21 am
BB –
Having studied the article and, well, having heard nothing from Goat to support his theory, I am, nevertheless, in a quandary… The author of the article offers some great arguments to suggest that the science behind abiogenic oil production is profoundly flawed (ie, no definitive science), theories unproven, etc. Explanations for oil that seems to replenish depleted sources years later and so forth.
On the other hand, there is no proof indicated that suggests that oil is completely biogenic. The abiogenic experimentation has, according to the article, produced ultrasignificantly less yield.
So…
What if both sources apply?
With the evidence supplied in the article, I would have to conclude that the biogenic theories are the ones that apply — they are, after all, the successful ones where actually finding oil are concerned.
Animal and vegetable triumph over mineral.
Who’da thunk it?
AB –
Bravo!!!!
Half a decade ago, I had as much regard for the Canadian government as I did for the French one, which doesn’t say much.
Today, my respect for both is tenfold and more.
Just keep your PM’s wife away from any rock star who has thick lips!
March 19th, 2008 at 5:31 pm
Oh I would just like to see them try it!
There will be public outcry!
March 19th, 2008 at 8:18 pm
Better respect the French government while you can:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/europe/sarkozy-punished-in-municipal-elections-793682.html
March 20th, 2008 at 1:16 am
Marie –
Watch for them to stealth it in. That seems to be the U.N.’s style, and definitely the Islamic style.
March 20th, 2008 at 1:34 am
BB –
And here I’d thought the French had seen the error of their ways.
I mean c’mon, 10 months! That’s not enough time to effect any kind of major change, good or bad, to an economy. Talk about a Utopian dream of instant results. So they’ll revert back to the socialist model that put them where they are to begin with, and resume their economic demise where they left off before Sarkozy. Les Idjits!
Just in case, I’d better finish off my Courvoisier VSOP supply right away. Perfect night (actually, wee hours) for it, as I’m in something of a directionless mood, anyway; My currently listening to a quagmire of a playlist consisting of Chick Corea followed by Enya and then Buckwheat Zydeco more than confirms that…
March 20th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
No Seth… the French are backsliding once again. We had false hope for them, it seems. Canada is doing well though, and better every day. They are fighting the libtards up there tooth and nail. We need to pray that they are successful! We can beat the libs but only if they don’t drive us nuts before we do so.
Now a Conressman libtard wants tax gas 50 cents on the gallon! They have no shame!
March 20th, 2008 at 12:54 pm
Gayle –
…but only if they don’t drive us nuts before we do so.
Well put!
As for the French, it must be the nature of the beast to repeat failing methods over and over expecting serendipity of some sort. Sounds a lot like our own left.
March 20th, 2008 at 3:52 pm
*sigh* back to American Fries (biggie-size that please), Thunderbird & Night Train to sip, booing the pyhhric victors at Borodino, Fermat’s Next To The Last Theorum, John-Claude Killy was a mere snowbum, dismissal of DeBroglie’s wave mechanics and DesCartes’ meaningless ramblings (like the Frogs to name a man Rene). If it wasn’t for Pasteur, a pox on the whole bunch, I say. Now Sarkozy, there’s a fellow of the ilk of Eliot ‘love em & leave em’ Spitzer. An American in French sunglasses, that one. Ceux-qui rient le vendredi, pleureront le dimanche!
March 20th, 2008 at 11:51 pm
BB –
“Freedom” fries, E&J XO brandy, Rene can walk away, as the song (by the Left Banke, no less) goes, the $XXX Spitzer lifestyle is as French as things get, and I would either fracture my tonsils or choke to death if I ever tried to read your last sentence aloud.
March 21st, 2008 at 7:01 am
In case you wondered, the UN has supplanted many governments by becoming a “law maiking” body. Many of its resolutions are now quoted in courts as “Inetrnational Law”, usually most frequently by anti-Western or Anti-US lawyers trying to drag their own governments into court. It is frequently quoted here by “Human Rights” lawyers defending murderers and terrorists in order to prevent their extradition to their home country on the grounds that they would be facing a death penalty there. In the UN double-speak Human Rights Charter, rigorously enforced by the likes of Blair and his mutli-millionaire wife (Enriched by the Human Rights legislation her husband steered through our legislature!) in most “democratic” countries, but studiously ignored in Islamic states.
One thing we must all remember is that Islam is, as a religion, going through the sort of cathartic metamorphosis the Christian world went through in the 1500 - 1700 period of radical versus established. It is a power struggle with power in Islam currently in the hands of the Imams just as it rested with the Popes in Christianity until the Reformation.
In the Islamic calendar the date is currently 1426. Need I say more? Those in power in Islamic countries cannot afford to allow any close scrutiny of their “faith” since that would expose the fact that it is the Christian Heresy “Manechesim”, a form of Gnosticism and much of the Koran (First written down around 200 years after Mohammed) is based on Gnostic Christian and extra-canonical Jewish scripture. Such an exposure would cause the hold of the current crop of Imams to be broken - and it would lead to a collapse of their power.
March 21st, 2008 at 6:03 pm
Gray Monk –
There is some of that U.N. inspired malarkey here in the U.S. as well. Our own Supreme Court seems to subscribe to some of it, as they took it upon themselves not long ago to join the GITMO fray, for example, and politicians on the left side of the aisle also attempted to reinterpret “international law” therein. The result of all that is that the American taxpayer’s hard-earned money finances a quality of treatment of captured terrorists that far exceeds that of the criminals incarcerated in our own prisons.
I’ve long maintained, as did even former N.Y. Mayor Ed Koch, a Democrat no less, that we should years ago have evicted the U.N. from N.Y. and absented our country from that quagmire of anti-western corruption.
I completely agree with you re Islam — no modern religious or other institution that can lay claim to the description of civilized would feature the behavior we’ve seen enacted on Islam’s behalf. No religion that has successfully negotiated entry into any recent century would treat women as Islam does or raise its children on a diet of intolerance and hate.
As far as the Imams’ power is concerned, their tame global media (including the western MSM), naive western politicians on both sides of the endless political debate and various useful idiots of the left continuously stack the deck in their favor — the problem that is Islam is only becoming continuously and exponentially more dangerous to the non-Islamic world. Add to that the fact that very few so-called “moderate” or peaceful Muslims are heard voicing any opposition to extremism. If anything, they complain that they are victims because of the profiling and suspicion they encounter at airports and other places.
As you explained previously, the politicians in Britain act with or without the consent of the people. Here, we actually have a voice (though we generally have to browbeat our elected officials, en masse, to be heard!), which worked favorably in the last couple of years; Muslim cab drivers at some of our airports were refusing to take fares who were carrying duty free liquor or were accompanied by seeing eye dogs on religious grounds, but it didn’t wash. Over there, I understand that banks suspended handing out piggy banks for children because they might offend Muslims, etc. I sincerely hope it doesn’t get that extreme over here — it might if the dhimmi left has their way in permitting Islam to impose itself on our day-to-day lifestyles, our lawmaking bodies and our courts.
I don’t think you or I will see them emerge from the dark ages in our lifetime — in fact, I believe that the conflict between our civilizations will only be resolved, sooner or later, by all out war (think matter vs anti-matter colliding), and it will involve guerilla activity in major cities all over the planet. Thus far, such debacles are occurring mostly in eastern countries, but that will not keep for too many more decades, if even that long.